« on: December 23, 2014, 08:54:46 PM »
I think the retrospective 20 is needed for 70-200 2.8
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.
We need to get some of that stuff he's smoking.I think it must be Nik...huana
It's no waste, particularly if you might get a FF body down the road. Glass lasts a long time, bodies change faster. I never used the kit lens on my T2i or purchased any EF-S lenses for it. I purchased L glass to go with it and and kept adding to the collection. The 24-105L was my first L and it got a lot of use. Three years later I purchased a 6D. Some lenses that are soft around the edge might even benefit from a crop sensor ;-)+1 Exactly! I think FF L lenses is the obvious way to go if someone intends to upgrade to FF.
I later decided to go the M route for my crop sensor and added some EF-M lenses for it. I occasionally mount some L glass on it.
I could think of a 22 MP 5DIV with 3200ish ISO 6400 and 12800ish ISO 25600, this would make some very usable ISO 51200. But I also know, this might remain wishful thinking.It's a reasonable wish (if they update their manufacturing process...)
If it is dark i under-expose, if it is bright I over expose. Oddly this logic seems to work for me. well, to my taste anyway!It is a great picture. Although it is a little dark for my own preferences I understand your concept to preserve the mood. After all this is just old (and valid) school to cater for the exposure meters which try to put everything in zone V. Congatulations again
So you have no big tele's and you say you are well covered for sport and bird!! Plus, you have 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 and you say you have to improve on landscape and portrait?Ok. Rephrased, I get it. What I suppose I should have asked is given my present gear, which lens would increase my utility the most, ignoring superteles bc I intend to buy later.
What do you want to do with your supposed new gear?
Landscape? Sport? Portait? Bird? Underwater? They are all valid 'utility' yet the gears required are vastly different.
Sport I feel I have fairly well covered, as well as bird. Portrait and landscape are areas of my kit I'd like to see improved upon.
The 5D3 is more camera than I ever need, but it really rocks. What I'd wish for a next version is a decent increase in high ISO IQ above ISO 12.8 k and 22 MP or not more than 24 MP.+1
For a specific technology I think they do at least a little.Interesting that two competing features are chosen, both by about 50% of the respondents. These are higher megapixels and the other is better low light noise.
Those don't compete.
+100000000000000 Very good suggestion!How about "Elimination of horizontal/vertical noise banding"?