January 27, 2015, 04:33:01 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 - AvTvM

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 82
376
EOS Bodies / Re: A Few EOS 7D Mark II Specs [CR1]
« on: June 17, 2014, 11:41:36 AM »
I think our favorite spot on the mode dial is a religious matter -- it often defines our first priority to the shot and everything else follows.  Mine is locked on Av unless (a) I deliberately want a specific shutter (< 1% of the time) or (b) I've got the flash on in really low light and I go to M.  It's not right, it's not wrong.  It's what I do.  Each of us has our own sensibilities to follow.

+1
Exactly what I do!!
But unlike you I hate to use AUTO ISO on my 7D as i often find it not to select high enough ISO's. I like the auto-metering of my camera, I seldom use spot metering, only in extremely different lit situations where I would need DR my camera can't offer.

Auto-ISO on the 7D unfortunately is still limited, even after firmware update 2.0 
Only 5D 3 and 1-series have fully functional Auto-ISO. sigh.

377
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 11:08:47 AM »
Not necessarily.  What is the T-stop of of the 35 f/2 IS?  T/2.  What is the T-stop of the 24-70 f/2.8 II?  T/3.  Modern coatings are much better than they were a decade ago.  It's time for you to sell the 55-250 and buy the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II because that is what you really want.   ::)

For less expensive, darkish consumer zoom lenses, manufacturers tend to LIE MORE regarding focal lengths and f-stop. ;-)

and btw ... i got both, EF-S 55-250 and EF 70-200/2.8 II ... and use each for its own. I do have pictures, where I could not tell from just looking at them, with which one they were made. ;-)

378
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:29:36 AM »
you're not going to see a significant difference between 5.6 and 6.3 for any of your issues though.

yeah, but
1. every bit worse hurts ... anything from f/5.6 onward is twilight zone anyways ;-)
2. especially considering how ALL manufacturers LIE about focal lengths and f-stops ... in reality f/5.6 often really means T/6.2  and f/6.3 means T/7.9 ... or so  ::)

379
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:25:13 AM »
Regardless, I think the main reason for the f/6.3 is a size reduction.

same.  even if this factors in as a not cheap item to get all the way over to NA, I'll probably get one just because it's far more smaller than the EF-S + adapter.

Just an interesting comparison (granted the fuji is faster - but you don't have any other options).

Between the APS-C short registration systems, the telephoto kit len's:

Fuji 2.95 x 4.65" 20.46 oz  f/3.5-4.8
Sony 2.5 x 4.25 12.1 oz  f/4.5-6.3
Canon M 2.4" x 3.38 9.17 oz f/4.5-6.3

I do expect the Canon EF-M 55-200 to be a better perfermer in terms of IQ than both the much more expensive Fuji [which is not great] and the Sony lens. But lets wait and see .. MTF charts anyone? ... and then test results and pictures. :-)

Of course this lens only was announced, because I recently purchased the EF-S 55-250 for use as light telezoom on both my 7D and via adapter on the M.  ;D

380
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 10:17:36 AM »
Regarding the f/6.3, isn't the f stop somewhat moot with contrast detect AF?  Of course more light is likely better, but I thought that was more of an issue with phase detect.  Canon has had P&S cameras for years with >f/5.6 and contrast detect AF.  How is this any different?

EOS-M has hybrid Af ... phase detect on sensor  + contrast-detect. Less light will certainly not help AF, although the issue might not be as bad as on DSLR/phase AF-only system.

Plus f/6.3 on a 200mm lens (equivalent FOV to 320mm lens on EOS M/APOS-C sensor) will require use of higher ISO setting quite often to get fast enough shutter speeds to freeze motion in anything other than fully sunlit scenes ...   

Yet another issue are diffraction losses. f/4 typically delivers maximum sharpness on APS-C sensors, from f/8 onward diffraction losses will set in. A f/6.3 APS-C lens does not leave room for stopping down.

See for example photozone-review of Canon EF-S 10-18/4.0-5.6 ... which shows diffraction losses already at f/8.
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/874-canon_1018_4556is?start=1
Quote
We've seen it already with the Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM ... Canon really knows how to design sharp lenses even at this price point. The MTF results are nothing short of astounding. However, first of all some comments regarding the "curves" below. Some of you may be surprised that the lens is capable of providing its best results at max. aperture. This may sound strange but please keep in mind that APS-C lenses perform best around f/4 (full format: around f/5.6) and diffraction has already an impact when stopping down. Thus because the Canon lens is "so slow" to start with, it performs already best between f/4.5 and f/5.6.
The center quality is generally excellent till f/8 and the borders as well as the corners are very good. At f/11 diffraction has a significant impact already. Usually we don't include the reading for f/16 but we've shown it here just to illustrate that this setting should be avoided on APS-C cameras. The reduced quality has nothing to do with the lens, this is just physics in action.

381
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 09:48:26 AM »
I really don't bother. I just thought that it was odd when the others have metal mounts.

yep, I agree. Even though I don't really mind plastic mounts on cheap lenses, a metal mount would have been "nicer" and in line with the other, rather well constructed lenses in the EF-M range. Even the EF-M 18-55 kit zoom got a metal mount, as opposed to the EF-S 18-55 STM (plastic).

But again, a rather superficial corner cut, compared to f/6.3 on the long end.   

382
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 09:21:16 AM »
First EF-M lens with plastic mount.  ???

so what ... it won't hurt optical performance nor durability. It's a convenience consumer lens at an affordable price. 
People who insist on metal mounts can get the all-metal EF-M/EF adapter and mount their full metal jacket L lenses. Or pay 1 grand a pop for Fuji X-lenses or Sony FE-"Zeiss"-pancakes.

I'd have happily traded the savings from plastic vs. metal mount against 1 stop more light though. ;-)

383
A7s is doomed to fail as a video camera, since it cannot even record 4k Video without using an external device, that is not even available yet.

A7s is doomed as a stills camera, because it only offers somehwat better offer Hi-ISO performance (from 6400 upwards) in exchange for the very low resolution. It would need to be CLEARLY better ...
 
A7s is doomed, because it is a totally compromised video-stills bastard, offering less than desirable competence for either task. And due to that it is also too expensive for what it is. Compared to A7, A7R, 5D II, D800, GH4, ...
 

384
Lenses / Re: Mt Yasur, Vanuatu lens advice
« on: June 17, 2014, 07:05:48 AM »
I've not been there, but it certainly looks like an interesting place to see.

I'd guess a 24-105 should be sufficient ... unless there's even more volcanic activity than here ... then I#d want a longish tele lens.  :P
http://avatarlogs.com/2010/08/21/tanna-mt-yasur/

385
Lenses / Re: EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM Coming Shortly
« on: June 17, 2014, 06:57:29 AM »
Sony sells a BUTT LOAD of their similarly spec'd lens because it's a kit lens, bundled with their cameras. That's exactly what Canon was going for. And they're smart to do so.

yes, Canon would be smart to also sell a CAMERA to go with this "kit lens".  ;D

For the U.S: Canon might not be selling this lens AT ALL.   ;)

386
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 04:36:26 AM »
Now we have a price for Europe:  € 329,-
http://www.photoscala.de/Artikel/EF-M-45-6355-200-mm-IS-STM

If optical performance is on par with the EF-S 55-250 STM, then it is well worth the money.
Provided, one cares for a f/4.5-6.3 lens ... with only 1 dated camera body available to mount it on. :-)

387
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 03:33:21 AM »
Overall a good sign, meaning Canon has not given up on EOS-M system yet.
Will be interesting to see, what Canon's will do regarding their mirrorless APS-C offering ... 

1. Will the EF-M 55-200 be offered in US?
The lens is featured on the Canon Europe homepage and on Japan, China and other Asian homepages. But not (yet?) on US homepage.
We will know the answer quite soon.

2. Will EOS M2 be offered in Europe too? In US?
Currently open to anybody's guess. Personally, I don't think so.

3. Will there be an M3?
same thing as now, just with DPAF 70D sensor + AF?
Or higher end, with EVF ... as a fully capable Fuji XT-1 competitor?
and when?
And if so ... will it be offered in Japan/China only? Or Asia? Europe? US?

My best case scenario would be a surprise "killer EOS-M3" announced in August/for photokina ... fully competitive mirrorless APS-C body [+system] in terms of sensor, AF performance, EVF, battery charge. Don't think it will happen, though. More likely, Canon will continue to snooze and lose ... and continue to watch how Sony and Fuji are nibbling away at their APS-C market share. :-)

388
To get to clean, high ISOs, you need larger and fewer pixels. To get high resolution, you need more pixels, but the trade-off will be high ISO performance. If you want a reasonable compromise, you go somewhere in the middle.

High megapixels, low noise, High ISOs – regardless of the brand of sensor, you can have two of those things, but never all three.

Unfortunately only true for today's Canon sensors.

All other manfufacturers are proving, that a good sensor design and good electronics behind it cause only minimal hits in Hi-ISO performance (mainly at ludicrously high ISOs beyond 6400) despite hi rez.

Michael Reichmann in his LL review of the A7s comes to the same conclusion:
12 MP A7s has onöly a tiny Hi-ISO advantage over 36 MP A7R ... in practive only relevant from ISO 6400 upwards.

I would be more than happy to give up 1 stop nosie advantage from 6400 upwards .. if I could get a Canon 36+ MP camera with D800E performance  ... in a mirrorless cam ... sized and priced like the Sony A7R. :-)

389
Lenses / Re: EF-M 55-200 4.5-6.3 IS STM Coming Shortly
« on: June 17, 2014, 03:12:01 AM »
f/5.6 --> f/6.3 is 1/3 of a stop.  REALLY people?  You're going to ***** and moan about 1/3 of a stop?  Seriously?  OBVIOUSLY, the point of the M is to shrink things down as much as possible.  1/3 of a stop throughout the focal range is a "duh" kind of compromise.  As in... DUH... DO IT!  (when talking about mirrorless)

Yes, I do take issue with f/6.3 - beecause in practice it likely means T/7.9
Instead of filter thread 52mm, Canon shouild have made it f/5.6 and 55mm or f/4.0 and 58mm filter thread, even if that wozuld have meant 50 grams more or 100 grams more weight and 50 dollars or 100 dollars higher price. 


390
EOS-M / Re: Canon EF-M 55-200 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Gets Official
« on: June 17, 2014, 02:57:02 AM »
EF-M 55-200 with specs is also listed on Canon Europe homepage:
http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home/Product_Finder/Cameras/EF_Lenses/EF-M/EF_M_55-200mm_f_4.5_6.3_IS_STM/


Image size   APS-C
35mm film equivalent focal length (mm)   88-320
Angle of view (horzntl, vertl, diagnl)   23°20′ - 6°30′  / 15°40′ - 4°20′  / 27°50′ - 7°50′
Lens construction (elements/groups)   17/11
No. of diaphragm blades   7

Minimum aperture   22-32¹
Closest focussing distance (m)   1.0
Maximum magnification (x)   0.21 (at 200mm)

Distance Information   Yes
Image stabilizer   3.5
AF actuator   STM
Filter diameter (mm)    52
Max. diameter x length (mm)   60.9 x 86.5
Weight (g)   260

Lens Cap   E-52 II
Lens hood   ET-54B
Lens case/pouch   LP816
Lens Dust Cap E

Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 82