September 17, 2014, 03:49:21 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 - tron

Pages: 1 ... 47 48 [49] 50 51 ... 122
721
Canon General / Re: Where you keep your wedding gear?
« on: July 07, 2013, 01:23:57 PM »



I keep my "wedding gear" where every gentleman does…  ::)
;D  ;D  ;D

722
EOS Bodies / Re: Why a high MP camera?
« on: July 07, 2013, 01:19:44 PM »
5DIII owners are arguing this point as if they are Macgyvers of photography who get the job done with the bare minimum... lol

There are plenty of uses for infinitely high megapixel counts.  Maybe not for weddings or casual shooting... but in general, you might accomplish the same shot with a cheaper/sharper lens and still have the freedom to frame what you want after the shot.  Working in advertising, I often reuse the same image for different purposes—some cropped in extremely close.  With retina displays coming on to the scene, high resolution isn't just for big prints. 

Also, for stock photography photos are priced by size (at least on istockphoto).  Not to say that most people NEED those big sizes... but as long as they will pay, I am a fan
1st. You are being both rude and ignorant of the fact that not everyone needs a high megapixel camera. Your needs are NOT everyone's needs. The mere fact that you laugh at people who are satisfied with their 5DIII camera is ... funny to say the least...  Especially since NO ONE  said there shouldn't be a high megapixel camera.
2nd. You ignore the fact that lenses cannot resolve "infinite megapixels" Take a look at DxO for a change...
3rd. A cheaper/sharper lens. Mmmm interesting. With a few exceptions cheaper and sharper are mutually exclusive properties.

723
EOS Bodies / Re: Why a high MP camera?
« on: July 07, 2013, 10:35:05 AM »
I'm sure the threads in the Nikon forums back then ("12 mp is enough, no one needs 21mp") are the same as from Canon loyalists now ("22mp is enough, no one needs 36mp")...

Similar but not the same or even close. 12 -> 21 is a much bigger jump in system resolution than 22 -> 36, taking into account all other factors for resolution.
+1 Plus, it's the combinations of Cameras and Lenses that count so the difference of 22Mpixel Canon with top Canon lenses and 36Mpixel Nikon with top Nikon lenses is not so much according to DxO if I recall correctly. Sure D800 wins but not by much.

There are Nikon lenses equal good as Canon, there are lenses from Sigma, Tamron etc
Put a good lens on a d800 and I guarantee that you will se a difference, the same difference IF Canon had a 36Mp camera today
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/%28lens1%29/886/%28lens2%29/175/%28brand1%29/Canon/%28camera1%29/795/%28brand2%29/Nikkor/%28camera2%29/792

I was thinking of the above DxO comparison:
Canon 5D3 with Canon 24-70 2.8 II and Nikon D800 with Nikon  AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

724
Boo! You only tested the 40mm at one focal length???? Incomplete review!

Yeah, sorry about that 8)  I'll try to milk more focal lengths out of it the next time.
;D You have to test it at least at 39mm and 41mm  ;D

725
Canon General / Re: Clarification....Fine Art
« on: July 07, 2013, 10:03:56 AM »
This will bring the same views as when CDs started to usurp the analogue 33 1/3 world. When you look at those multi million $ images ,esp the one of the girl in the dress as well the Rhine one ,it seems the answer is ....whoever will pay for it can call it what they want.
;D  ;D  ;D

726
EOS Bodies / Re: Why a high MP camera?
« on: July 07, 2013, 09:57:52 AM »
I'm sure the threads in the Nikon forums back then ("12 mp is enough, no one needs 21mp") are the same as from Canon loyalists now ("22mp is enough, no one needs 36mp")...

Similar but not the same or even close. 12 -> 21 is a much bigger jump in system resolution than 22 -> 36, taking into account all other factors for resolution.
+1 Plus, it's the combinations of Cameras and Lenses that count so the difference of 22Mpixel Canon with top Canon lenses and 36Mpixel Nikon with top Nikon lenses is not so much according to DxO if I recall correctly. Sure D800 wins but not by much.

727
EOS Bodies / Re: Why a high MP camera?
« on: July 06, 2013, 11:28:46 AM »
As long as there is a 5DMark whatever camera with no more that the current number of Megapixels I am fine!

I do not need more Mpixels, I prefer lower noise and higher DR. I respect however other people's wishes/needs.

I hope when they make a high Mpixel camera that it will be a totally new model and not a 5D one...

728
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Canon 40D to 5D Classic. Good upgrade?
« on: July 05, 2013, 08:27:06 AM »
I hope to keep the Mark 3 forever. :)
Me too but forever is too long. If 5DMkIV has the same number of megapixels, lower noise, higher DR and 1 or 2 fps more I would certainly get it. Until then I enjoy using my 5D3  :)

729
Lenses / Re: Help me choose 40 v 50(1.4)
« on: July 04, 2013, 09:14:34 PM »
I had 50 f1.4 before my 50L and currently own 40pancake. If I have to choose between these two, I would take 50 f1.4 over 40pancake.

Why?
1. Lens is sharp from f2 to f5.6(at f2.8 both 50 & 40 is about the same to me)
2. Gain extra shutter speed or one f-stop in extreme low light condition. IQ might not as best as 50L, but hey...you taking picture in the dark here @ f1.4. You CAN'T do this with 40pancake.
3. Easy to shoot on FF
4. Much smaller than 50L, not so heavy to carry around

If you want to convert your FF DSLR into P&S, then get 40pancake ;)
+100 No reason to get the 40mm. You have 40mm at f/4 (with the zoom) but you do not have 1.4

730
Reviews / Re: Review - Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
« on: July 03, 2013, 12:14:30 PM »
I would have like to see some photos in the review taken without flash, to get a true idea of how well the lens performs.  Flash always make the images look artificially sharp, now matter how good (or bad) a lens is...
I am pretty sure that the sunset has been photographed without ... flash  ;D  ;D  ;D

731
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D a New Benchmark in ISO Performance?
« on: July 03, 2013, 09:53:12 AM »
Where exactly was stated or who said, that 70D will set a new benchmark for High ISO? ..

Maybe this:

"The EOS 70D sensor has been manufactured using new materials in the colour filter, which enables the camera to achieve higher light transmittance. When combined with improved transistors inside the pixels, the EOS 70D is able to shoot at higher ISO speeds than previous models, whilst ensuring advanced image quality."

http://www.eos-magazine.com/EOS%20digital%20cameras/EOS%20system/Digital%20cameras/EOS%2070D/eos70d.html
This is a rather vague description. It doesn't say anything specific.

For example: Raw files, ISO xxx of 70D = Raw files ISO yyy of another Canon camera

Anything else is marketing BS!

Au contraire...it's quite specific, and unassailable truth. Let's break it down:

1) new CFA materials with higher transmittance, and new circuitry - ok, we have to take Canon's word on that, but why would they lie?  And if the new CFA materials lower production costs and just happen to have higher transmittance as a side effect, that's all good.

2) the 70D is able to shoot at higher ISOs than previous models - it's spec is 100-12800 with one stop expanded, and the 60D is 100-6400 with one stop expanded, so that's true

3) it has advanced IQ - can be said of all current dSLRs, so that's true as well

See, that's the essence of marketing speak - be very specific and make accurate statements, whilst not really saying anything meaningful.

BS by any other name...   ::)
I am talking about ISO which is this thread's title.

Are we sure that Raw ISO 12800 performance of 70D = Raw ISO 6400 performance of 60D for example?

This is only the part I was criticizing and yes improved ISO performance is good for all of us so I do wish there will be. It is just that I will have to see something concrete to believe it...


732
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 70D a New Benchmark in ISO Performance?
« on: July 03, 2013, 09:36:16 AM »
Where exactly was stated or who said, that 70D will set a new benchmark for High ISO? ..

Maybe this:

"The EOS 70D sensor has been manufactured using new materials in the colour filter, which enables the camera to achieve higher light transmittance. When combined with improved transistors inside the pixels, the EOS 70D is able to shoot at higher ISO speeds than previous models, whilst ensuring advanced image quality."

http://www.eos-magazine.com/EOS%20digital%20cameras/EOS%20system/Digital%20cameras/EOS%2070D/eos70d.html
This is a rather vague description. It doesn't say anything specific.

For example: Raw files, ISO xxx of 70D = Raw files ISO yyy of another Canon camera

Anything else is marketing BS!

733
By the way it will be my first ... cap picture  ;D

734
I have used my 5D2 with the remote control many times and I have not observed anything wrong.
When I have time I will try the cap experiment.

735
Lenses / Re: Used 300 2.8 L IS Mk I
« on: July 02, 2013, 09:41:13 PM »
The slightly older US date code that was in impeccable condition.  ;D

I too thinking about 400 f2.8 IS version I. Would be nice to have version II, but the price tag is little too high for me.
Keep in mind that the 400 2.8 version I is VERY heavy!

Pages: 1 ... 47 48 [49] 50 51 ... 122